James C Sisson1, Barry L Shulkin, Susan Lawson. 1. Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA. jsisson@umich.edu
Abstract
UNLABELLED: There is no consensus on the amount of (131)I for treatment of patients with well-differentiated thyroid carcinoma; usual amounts vary widely. Body retention of (131)I has been shown to be a valuable index of radiation toxicity. If a broad range of body retentions occurs among patients, then high and low retentions will be a basis for modifying the usual prescriptions for (131)I to ensure safety and increase efficacy. METHODS: After withdrawal of thyroid hormone in 87 patients, the fractional retention of diagnostic (131)I in each body was measured at 2 d by a scintillation probe. In 43 patients, the retention was measured 2 d after therapeutic (131)I. RESULTS: Diagnostic retention varied from 0.01 to 0.51, with a median of 0.15. These retentions did not correlate with any index of health, thyroid hormone, or carcinoma status. Seventeen patients, previously treated with (131)I, exhibited a significantly lower mean retention. In 43 patients, retention of diagnostic (131)I was highly correlated with retention of therapeutic (131)I: diagnostic predicted therapeutic retention with a mean error of 0.04. In 10 patients receiving thyroxine, the mean retention of diagnostic (131)I after recombinant human TSH (rhTSH) was strikingly lower, 0.06, with a range of 0.016-0.16. CONCLUSION: Body retentions of (131)I are easily measured and vary considerably among patients. Because increased therapeutic (131)I will impart greater irradiation of tumor, and body retention has been accepted as an index of toxicity from (131)I, the use of body retention could enable prescriptions of therapeutic (131)I that enable increased efficacy while ensuring safety. If tumor retention is not proportionally decreased with the body retention of (131)I after rhTSH, then rhTSH may enable increased therapeutic efficacy.
UNLABELLED: There is no consensus on the amount of (131)I for treatment of patients with well-differentiated thyroid carcinoma; usual amounts vary widely. Body retention of (131)I has been shown to be a valuable index of radiation toxicity. If a broad range of body retentions occurs among patients, then high and low retentions will be a basis for modifying the usual prescriptions for (131)I to ensure safety and increase efficacy. METHODS: After withdrawal of thyroid hormone in 87 patients, the fractional retention of diagnostic (131)I in each body was measured at 2 d by a scintillation probe. In 43 patients, the retention was measured 2 d after therapeutic (131)I. RESULTS: Diagnostic retention varied from 0.01 to 0.51, with a median of 0.15. These retentions did not correlate with any index of health, thyroid hormone, or carcinoma status. Seventeen patients, previously treated with (131)I, exhibited a significantly lower mean retention. In 43 patients, retention of diagnostic (131)I was highly correlated with retention of therapeutic (131)I: diagnostic predicted therapeutic retention with a mean error of 0.04. In 10 patients receiving thyroxine, the mean retention of diagnostic (131)I after recombinant human TSH (rhTSH) was strikingly lower, 0.06, with a range of 0.016-0.16. CONCLUSION: Body retentions of (131)I are easily measured and vary considerably among patients. Because increased therapeutic (131)I will impart greater irradiation of tumor, and body retention has been accepted as an index of toxicity from (131)I, the use of body retention could enable prescriptions of therapeutic (131)I that enable increased efficacy while ensuring safety. If tumor retention is not proportionally decreased with the body retention of (131)I after rhTSH, then rhTSH may enable increased therapeutic efficacy.
Authors: Márcia Augusta da Silva; Flávia Gomes Silva Valgôde; Júlia Armiliato Gonzalez; Hélio Yoriyaz; Maria Inês Calil Cury Guimarães; Maria Teresa Carvalho Pinto Ribela; Carlos Alberto Buchpiguel; Paolo Bartolini; Kayo Okazaki Journal: Radiat Environ Biophys Date: 2016-03-24 Impact factor: 1.925
Authors: Donika Plyku; Robert F Hobbs; Kevin Huang; Frank Atkins; Carlos Garcia; George Sgouros; Douglas Van Nostrand Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2017-01-19 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: I Borget; H Remy; J Chevalier; M Ricard; M Allyn; M Schlumberger; G De Pouvourville Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2008-04-02 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Megan R Haymart; Mousumi Banerjee; Di Yang; Andrew K Stewart; Jennifer J Griggs; James C Sisson; Ronald J Koenig Journal: Endocr Pract Date: 2013 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 3.443